From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Korsgaard Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] ARM: OMAP: sram: Add am33xx SRAM support (minimal) Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2012 15:24:05 +0100 Message-ID: <87fweeyfp6.fsf@macbook.be.48ers.dk> References: <1329113715-7634-1-git-send-email-afzal@ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-wi0-f174.google.com ([209.85.212.174]:37074 "EHLO mail-wi0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751575Ab2BMOYN (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Feb 2012 09:24:13 -0500 Received: by wics10 with SMTP id s10so3492724wic.19 for ; Mon, 13 Feb 2012 06:24:12 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <1329113715-7634-1-git-send-email-afzal@ti.com> (Afzal Mohammed's message of "Mon, 13 Feb 2012 11:45:15 +0530") Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Afzal Mohammed Cc: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, nsekhar@ti.com, Vaibhav Bedia , hvaibhav@ti.com >>>>> "Afzal" == Afzal Mohammed writes: Afzal> From: Vaibhav Bedia Afzal> Update SRAM start & size for am33xx SoC's. Afzal> Note: cpu_is_34xx() is true for am33xx also. Doing Afzal> cpu_is_am33xx() check after cpu_is_34xx() will not Afzal> achieve what we want due to the above reason. Afzal> Hence cpu_is_am33xx() is done before cpu_is_34xx() Afzal> } else { Afzal> - if (cpu_is_omap34xx()) { Afzal> + if (cpu_is_am33xx()) { Afzal> + omap_sram_start = AM33XX_SRAM_PA; Afzal> + omap_sram_size = 0x10000; /* 64K */ Afzal> + } else if (cpu_is_omap34xx()) { Afzal> omap_sram_start = OMAP3_SRAM_PA; Afzal> omap_sram_size = 0x10000; /* 64K */ I don't particular know the omap sram stuff, but doesn't the 33xx have 2x 64K blocks of SRAM? Afzal> +static inline int am33xx_sram_init(void) Afzal> +{ Afzal> + return 0; I know you mentioned it in the commit message, but it might be good with a comment here as well that this dummy function is needed to not get the 34xx init function called for 33xx, so it doesn't get removed when somebody decides to cleanup. Afzal> +} Afzal> + Afzal> int __init omap_sram_init(void) Afzal> { Afzal> omap_detect_sram(); Afzal> @@ -379,6 +387,8 @@ int __init omap_sram_init(void) Afzal> omap242x_sram_init(); Afzal> else if (cpu_is_omap2430()) Afzal> omap243x_sram_init(); Afzal> + else if (cpu_is_am33xx()) Afzal> + am33xx_sram_init(); Afzal> else if (cpu_is_omap34xx()) Afzal> omap34xx_sram_init(); -- Bye, Peter Korsgaard From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jacmet@sunsite.dk (Peter Korsgaard) Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2012 15:24:05 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v2 2/2] ARM: OMAP: sram: Add am33xx SRAM support (minimal) In-Reply-To: <1329113715-7634-1-git-send-email-afzal@ti.com> (Afzal Mohammed's message of "Mon, 13 Feb 2012 11:45:15 +0530") References: <1329113715-7634-1-git-send-email-afzal@ti.com> Message-ID: <87fweeyfp6.fsf@macbook.be.48ers.dk> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org >>>>> "Afzal" == Afzal Mohammed writes: Afzal> From: Vaibhav Bedia Afzal> Update SRAM start & size for am33xx SoC's. Afzal> Note: cpu_is_34xx() is true for am33xx also. Doing Afzal> cpu_is_am33xx() check after cpu_is_34xx() will not Afzal> achieve what we want due to the above reason. Afzal> Hence cpu_is_am33xx() is done before cpu_is_34xx() Afzal> } else { Afzal> - if (cpu_is_omap34xx()) { Afzal> + if (cpu_is_am33xx()) { Afzal> + omap_sram_start = AM33XX_SRAM_PA; Afzal> + omap_sram_size = 0x10000; /* 64K */ Afzal> + } else if (cpu_is_omap34xx()) { Afzal> omap_sram_start = OMAP3_SRAM_PA; Afzal> omap_sram_size = 0x10000; /* 64K */ I don't particular know the omap sram stuff, but doesn't the 33xx have 2x 64K blocks of SRAM? Afzal> +static inline int am33xx_sram_init(void) Afzal> +{ Afzal> + return 0; I know you mentioned it in the commit message, but it might be good with a comment here as well that this dummy function is needed to not get the 34xx init function called for 33xx, so it doesn't get removed when somebody decides to cleanup. Afzal> +} Afzal> + Afzal> int __init omap_sram_init(void) Afzal> { Afzal> omap_detect_sram(); Afzal> @@ -379,6 +387,8 @@ int __init omap_sram_init(void) Afzal> omap242x_sram_init(); Afzal> else if (cpu_is_omap2430()) Afzal> omap243x_sram_init(); Afzal> + else if (cpu_is_am33xx()) Afzal> + am33xx_sram_init(); Afzal> else if (cpu_is_omap34xx()) Afzal> omap34xx_sram_init(); -- Bye, Peter Korsgaard